Brad "Frickin" Treliving

[TheSutterDynasty]

Originally Posted by transplant99

He may have delivered a 100 pt season..but also delivered a team that got snot bubbled in the playoffs with a G that played out of his mind much more than not.

Not sure how much leeway that buys him.

Let me ask you this..

If they miss the playoffs or are even knocked out in round 1 again..do you think he will be retained? (Unless a series of injuries to key guys etc can be pointed to)

I am a fan of his work overall to be honest, but this deal smacks of desperation to me and when thats starts to happen, you can usually see the end coming sonner rather than later.

How is it possibly the GMs fault if the team performs poorly in the playoffs?

His job is to put together a good team on paper. Performance is on the players and coaching staff.

Then, based on results, the GM should tweak the team based on what seemed to be missing.

Every year Treliving has attempted to do just that. While Lucic is a bum, on paper he's getting rid of a bad "goal scorer" contract and trading it for a bad "power forward" type contract - of which we seemed to be missing this year.

[Diemenz]

I just need to see if I am hearing this right.

Majority of people on CP wanted Neal scratched every single game. Now that he is an oiler he is going to score 35 and be a game changer?

Ok.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by transplant99

He may have delivered a 100 pt season..but also delivered a team that got snot bubbled in the playoffs with a G that played out of his mind much more than not.

Not sure how much leeway that buys him.

Let me ask you this..

If they miss the playoffs or are even knocked out in round 1 again..do you think he will be retained? (Unless a series of injuries to key guys etc can be pointed to)

I am a fan of his work overall to be honest, but this deal smacks of desperation to me and when thats starts to happen, you can usually see the end coming sonner rather than later.

I hope he’s retained to be the man that reshapes the franchise next summer
I’ve said this before but a hallmark of ineffective franchises is constant turnover at the top.
If they get rid of him it’s just more of the same
Rinse and repeat

[SportsJunky]

Originally Posted by Rando

The owners probably like this move much more than fans. It saves them over seven million over the life of both contracts.

For all that we know, ownership may have made this call. BT didn't go out of his way to sell this deal to the fanbase. He may hate it, too.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I hope he’s retained to be the man that reshapes the franchise next summer
I’ve said this before but a hallmark of ineffective franchises is constant turnover at the top.
If they get rid of him it’s just more of the same
Rinse and repeat

It's pretty clear to me that reliving being the 2ns best gm in flames history says a lot more about how awful this franchise is than it does about trelivings gm skill.

I don't see the point in keeping a mediocre/bad gm in his place just because of tenure.

In the last 6 months Tre has tipped the scales imo.

Of course I think this is 100% on ownership, but I can't fire Murray so whatcha gonna do, brother?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Diemenz

I just need to see if I am hearing this right.

Majority of people on CP wanted Neal scratched every single game. Now that he is an oiler he is going to score 35 and be a game changer?

Ok.

No I don’t think you are hearing that right. I would say the general sentiment is that Neal has a greater likelihood of being an impact player than Lucic again but it’s likely bum for bum.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

It's pretty clear to me that reliving being the 2ns best gm in flames history says a lot more about how awful this franchise is than it does about trelivings gm skill.

I don't see the point in keeping a mediocre/bad gm in his place just because of tenure.

In the last 6 months Tre has tipped the scales imo.

Of course I think this is 100% on ownership, but I can't fire Murray so whatcha gonna do, brother?

See and I see the track record of so called bad gms as a symptom of them not being given enough time
Al Coates being a shining example
When you have a history of underperformance one should start looking for the common factors and patterns
Turnover of management being the chief one in my view

[Johnhitbox]

Originally Posted by Dajazz

Watch Neal pot 35 off McDavids wing and let’s revisit this thread.

Massive failure on behalf of Treliving, unless, there is something regarding the Neal situation that is not disclosed (unhappy, health, team chemistry).

I expected Neal to be worth more, he’s only one season removed from 25 goals and consecutive play off success. I’m assuming Tre knows better than me though. Still looks like a #### deal.

That’s exactly what will happen, he even said he was tired. I don’t want to see any level of success for that organization, but he will score at least 20 this year, and the oilers will make sure to rub that in our face. Just like chiasson. McJesus just makes all players look better.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

See and I see the track record of so called bad gms as a symptom of them not being given enough time
Al Coates being a shining example
When you have a history of underperformance one should start looking for the common factors and patterns
Turnover of management being the chief one in my view

My fear is if you give tre enough tenure then it won't be long until Al Coates is again regarded as the 2nd best gm in franchise history.

Outside of fleecing a loudmouth owner in his first days in the job, trelivings last 2 years have been awful exercises in how to rob the future of your organization blind.

An entire drafts worth of picks gone and now lucic of all players patrolling the 4th line at 5.25 a year with a NMC.

Someone take the reigns here before this thing goes off a cliff. It's going to take years for the full impact of this to be felt.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by TheSutterDynasty

How is it possibly the GMs fault if the team performs poorly in the playoffs?

His job is to put together a good team on paper. Performance is on the players and coaching staff.

Then, based on results, the GM should tweak the team based on what seemed to be missing.

Every year Treliving has attempted to do just that. While Lucic is a bum, on paper he's getting rid of a bad "goal scorer" contract and trading it for a bad "power forward" type contract - of which we seemed to be missing this year.

Seriously?

LOL...like why do any GM's get fired? I mean it's pretty obvious that if teams under perform, then without question the GM is a huge part of what needs to be changed. I find that statement just...odd.

And he is trading the bad contract that HE signed.

Im not at all advocating for him to be gassed, merely suggesting that after the disappointment of the playoff series in which his club got completely smoked, and spending to the cap year after year....ownership may be seriously looking at his performance as well as that of everyone involved.

He has been here 5 years now. He has fired 2 coaches, hired two coaches, and brought all of 8 home playoff dates in that time.

Its really not a stellar record in regards to results even though things were in shambles when he took over. I am only looking at this from an ownership perspective. I like BT a lot , I just believe that his rope is a lot shorter than it was and with what happened yesterday, its even shorter now.

[Enoch Root]

Continuity at the top is how you build a successful organization, not constant turnover.

This narrative that Treliving is in trouble - after the Flames just finished 2nd overall - is way off base IMO.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

See and I see the track record of so called bad gms as a symptom of them not being given enough time
Al Coates being a shining example
When you have a history of underperformance one should start looking for the common factors and patterns
Turnover of management being the chief one in my view

Continuity is great and all that...I agree.

But its only good if the decisions being made are taking the team to a better place. Not sure that is the case right now.

I mean look no further than Sutter who also took this club out of the abyss and made things very respectable, yet when he started to believe the noose was tightening, he made a bunch of poor to questionable choices which then, predictably, led to his demise and he was ushered out for the good of the franchise.

Im starting to get the same feeling with BT and yesterdays deal really reinforces that for me.

BT will be the GM moving forward, no doubt, I just fully believe that he is on the clock at this point and without improvement on the results of last season, may be outside looking in come next summer.

[bob-loblaw]

Wasn't Brad near the top in votes for Executive of the Year last year?

Tampa Bay crushes everyone they played in the regular season and they got bounced in the playoffs before we did. It's not always the GM's fault.

Plus, we have no idea about the back story here. Was Neal bad in the room? Did Neal ask for a trade? Did Peters want him gone? Was Neal mad they let Smith go? Did key players want some toughness because they felt out of their element? Did the owners want to save some money if they are contributing towards a new arena?

Everyone makes mistakes or does things they don't want to do. Every GM makes controversial moves. I think he deserves the benefit of the doubt on this one.

Don't forget, if he had to make a move with Neal that this contract was almost as untradeable as Lucic's. If Neal could have performed like did over his past eight seasons I'm sure he wouldn't have had to do this. No one could have predicted Neal would completely derail like he did. I'm sure the players didn't quite expect that either.

If a Treliving got cut loose he'd find a job easily. I'm pretty happy to with him. Not sure who the owners would want based on their budget, or who the fans would want either that is available.

[Strange Brew]

I will take a GM with a vision, plan and the ability to execute against that plan ahead of tenure 100 times out of 100.

The tenure argument doesn’t work for me. If you think Treliving is the right guy then I understand, but I’d rather it be based on agreeing with his approach to building a club vs. not wanting change.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I will take a GM with a vision, plan and the ability to execute against that plan ahead of tenure 100 times out of 100.

The tenure argument doesn’t work for me. If you think Treliving is the right guy then I understand, but I’d rather it be based on agreeing with his approach to building a club vs. not wanting change.

Continuity doesn't mean tenure, or not wanting change, it means giving the approach a chance to bear fruit.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Continuity doesn't mean tenure, or not wanting change, it means giving the approach a chance to bear fruit.

You mean like giving your biggest UFA signing in history more than 63 games instead of trading him for one of the very worst players/contracts in the league?

Exactly why this seems like a complete panic move.

[Enoch Root]

I think there is a pretty big difference between pulling the plug on a UFA that never fit in the lineup, and giving the GM time to execute his plan, but maybe that's just me

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I think there is a pretty big difference between pulling the plug on a UFA that never fit in the lineup, and giving the GM time to execute his plan, but maybe that's just me

So you are saying its giving things a chance to bear fruit...except when it doesn't, and that's OK because it fits your narrative that way?

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by transplant99

So you are saying its giving things a chance to bear fruit...except when it doesn't, and that's OK because it fits your narrative that way?

I think he’s being pretty clear on the distinction
I would argue continuity of management is more critical than continuity of ineffective players

[Enoch Root]

I think that you simply want to argue for argument's sake